Performance Evaluation Process

1. Group #6 Areij Alnajjar Neda khavari Waleed Ahmed Kunal Sawant Rishit Patel Submitted to: Prof. Vazan Performance Evaluation Process

2. Agenda • Performance Review and Planning Process • Assessment Tools • Why is the CEO Performance Evaluation so important? • Examples • Grote Approach software • CSUN Performance Evaluation Process • THE HALIFAX BANK

3. Performance Review and Planning Process • Philosophy and Purpose

4. Performance Review and Planning Process 2. Process

5. Performance Review and Planning Process 3. Policy Directive

6. Performance Review and Planning Process 4. Procedure

7. Assessment Tools

8. Assessment Tools

9. Why is the CEO Performance Evaluation so important?

10. How effective is your organization’s CEO performance management process? • Is the organization achieving its goals? • Is your CEO building on his or her strengths and improving any deficiencies? • Do the CEO performance evaluation criteria reflect your current strategy and priorities? Do you have the right measures of leadership effectiveness? Are similar criteria used to evaluate the top executive team to facilitate your leadership development and succession planning process? • Are the results of the evaluation consistent with the board’s CEO compensation decisions? • Is the entire board actively engaged in the evaluation process? Do board members all have an opportunity to provide candid and constructive feedback? Have newer board members been briefed on the process? How is the feedback of the executive team being incorporated into the process?

11. Purposes of CEO Evaluation Looking Back: • Critical decision about compensation • Decision about continuing the position Looking Forward: • Helps CEO & Board in future directions • Goal Setting as well as feedback enhancing ongoing leadership Both process are very critical

12. Guiding principles of CEO evaluation Evaluations differs from company to company • History & Culture • Market • Board/CEO relationship • Strategy Why are we engaging in this evaluation? • Compensation • Planning & Development • Feedback

13. Guiding principles of CEO evaluation What will be measured in the evaluation? • Financials Metrics • Operational results • Customer growth & satisfaction • People development • Leadership competencies

14. Guiding principles of CEO evaluation Who will be involved in the evaluation process? • Compensation committee • Board members • Executive Team • Critical customers What is the evaluation instrument and how will the results be communicated? • One-on-One with compensation committee Chair

15. CEO performance dimensions and measures

16. CEO performance dimensions and measures Leadership effectiveness metrics: • Leadership bench strength and diversity • Improved retention (reduced unwanted turnover) in leadership ranks • Employee engagement survey results Executive leadership behaviors: • Act with integrity and fairness • Encourage open discussion and debate • Create an inclusive environment • Recruit, coach, develop, and retain the best people • Foster learning, innovation, and change • Build strong customer, board, and other key stakeholder relationships

17. Relative Performance evaluation • Comparison with other companies • Factors beyond control

18. CSUN Performance Evaluation ProcessECE Department’s Procedures for Evaluation of Faculty Evaluation Criteria: A. Teaching Effectiveness B. Professional Preparation C. Contributions to the Field of Study D. Contributions to the University and Community Service E. Professional and Personal Responsibilities

19. CSUN Performance Evaluation ProcessECE Department’s Procedures for Evaluation of Faculty:

20. CSUN Performance Evaluation ProcessECE Department’s Procedures for Evaluation of Faculty: • 1.Frequency of Evaluation • normally occur at 5-year interval • 2.Identification of Faculty Members Scheduled for Evaluation • One-fifth of the affected faculty members will be evaluated • 3.Calendar for Evaluation

21. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) 4. Evidence to be used in Evaluating Instructional Performance • Teaching effectiveness shall be evaluated by: • examination of the student evaluation of faculty poll which is administered at the school level, classroom visitations by the department chair. • conversations with students. • discussions with faculty members other than those designated for classroom visitation. • and by the review of materials such as • course outlines • explanation of teaching methods • exams • student evaluations

22. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) • Professional Preparation • For the rank of Associate or Full Professor the possession of a doctorate is normally required. Faculty member with out doctorate should functioning at doctorate level. • Evidence of this may include, • An examination of publications, • Research in progress, • Testimonials from colleagues both within and without the university, • Awards and honors by professional societies for accomplishments,

23. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) • Contributions to the Field of Study: • All publications of the faculty member under consideration are evaluated. • Professional and Personal Responsibilities The senior faculty have all been asked to observe, where possible, the work of probationary faculty and faculty being considered for promotion. The knowledge gained shall be shared and discussed in a closed meeting of the senior tenured faculty.

24. Evidence of the faculty members contribution to the university and community such as: • 1. The enumeration of accomplishments (active memberships on committees, Boards) • 2. Comments from faculty and students concerning the quality of the work performed by the faculty member being evaluated • 3. Positions of responsibility held by the faculty member such as chairing committees, subcommittees, ad hoc committees or boards. • 4. Any reports, drawings, computer programs, video tapes, prepared by the faculty member pursuant to university or community service. • 5. Any letters of commendation that might be received.

25. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) 5.Documents to be Available to Reviewers • Personnel Action File • Only the department chair shall have access to these files. 6. Selection of Review Committee • The Department Chair will be responsible for the review. • The Chair shall appoint at least two tenured faculty to serve on each review committee, and will chair Them.

26. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) 7.Evaluation Conference • Following the evaluation, a meeting will be arranged with the faculty member to discuss the evaluation. 8. Preparation of the Written Evaluation • A summary of the evaluation will be given to the faculty member and a copy will be placed in his/her Personnel Action File.

27. CSUN Performance Evaluation Process(cont) 9. Student Participation • The student poll shall be used to evaluate teaching effectiveness (as outlined in Section 4.). • The chair or review committee shall make no other formal solicitation of student input. This procedure shall be reviewed yearly at the same time as other personnel procedures.

28. Student Evaluation of Faculty • ECE Department use a common ratings form and questionnaire, written comments form, and instructions for administration. • The process and its elements have been, and continue to be, established and monitored by the College Personnel Committee. • Although minimum requirements for the frequency of administration of the student evaluation of faculty are set by the University Personnel Planning and Review Committee.

29. Student Evaluation of Faculty Sample Questions • The course is well organized • The course is properly paced • The homework assignments helped in understanding the course material • The instructor comments constructively on students’ work • Grading is fair and impartial • Classroom presentations are good • The instructor stimulates students’ interest in course material • The instructor appears to know the subject matter well • I understand and can apply the material covered to date by this course • The instructor is willing and available to help students • I would recommend this instructor to my friends • The instructor is a very good teacher

30. Grote Approach software

31. Grote Approach software The Grote Approach employee performance appraisal system helps organizations:

32. The Grote Approach process

33. The Grote Approach form

34. Features & Benefits

35. THE HALIFAX BANK

36. THE HALIFAX BANK 1. In your opinion what is the performance evaluation system • Process to recruit people •  System through which performance is evaluated and future salary will be managed • To choose the right people for the right job • Process by which employee performance gap will be analyzed in order to provide assistance to the employees to use their potential. • RESULT - evaluation system is a measure for objective analysis of employee performance and a means of enabling employees to enhance performance. ( 90%)

37. THE HALIFAX BANK • Performance evaluation in your opinion should be conducted after? RESULT -   There is wide variation for duration preferences. About 50% of respondents prefer half yearly or quarterly evaluation.

38. THE HALIFAX BANK • Do you get feed back of your evaluation? RESULT - About two thirds of the respondents say that they always receive feedback (Option “a”). One third say that they receive feedback seldom or never. • How do you feel when you get the results? • RESULT - Only about half of the respondents are satisfied With their evaluation.

39. THE HALIFAX BANK • Only a little over half the sample employees are committed to improving their performances in light of their evaluation. A significant minority remains unaffected. • An equal proportion of employees replied “positive” and “no” impact” on performance and behavior in response to performance evaluation. Almost a third of the sampled employees confessed to be “easy going” and to take little account of performance evaluation.

40. THE HALIFAX BANK • CONCLUSION : The overall conclusion is that the performance evaluation system at the Bank’s marketing and human resource development department does not positively influence performance and behavior of employees. The relatively weak findings show that had an objective analysis of the relationship between actual performance and (appropriately lagged) performance evaluation been done we would probably not be able to come up with encouraging results

41. References • http://www.groteapproach.com/about-us/index.asp • CSUN/ECE Department • http://www.dhrm.virginia.gov/hrpolicy/policy/perform140.pdf

42. Question